Design Observer :: Join the Discussion http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/ en-us Design Observer Group 2012-01-10T16:19:29-05:00 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0
Wall Street once roughly followed an actual earthen wall which was built as a barrier to hold back the encroaching English settlers and native Americans when New York was still New Amsterdam, and under Dutch control.

The Wall Street we know today could be scene as an equally important wall, albeit a symbolic one, which strengthens and reinforces the separation between the "1%" and the other "99%." A wall which facilitates and strengthens the divides between the excesses of the haves, and the needs and deficiencies of the have-nots.

In this sense, the huge buildings that line the streets -- the banks, financial institutions and trading companies -- could be seen as the towers, turrets and keeps within a castle wall, architectural appendages meant to protect the royal aristocracy that lives within it.

In medieval times, if peasants and commoners felt their lords, barons and kings weren't providing for them, or worse, taking their livelihood out from underneath them, they would sometimes rise up and try to take the castle. Sometimes they'd be successful but in most cases such uprisings failed.

Following this comparison it seems quite appropriate that, at a time when American commoners are losing their homes and jobs at an alarming rate while the top 1% lives off of their toils, the masses are now storming the castles of the rich barons who they perceive as holding them down and taking their livelihoods from them.

Not taking sides -- just making an observation of the underlying metaphor of the architecture here. Thanks!

]]> http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2012-01-10T16:19:29-05:00 This transformation into publically owned public space is quite beautiful and much needed. As people begin to understand the current state of things and begin to awaken and respond, public infrastructure will take on a new meaning and new requirements. What we are experiencing is a shift, not in what public space is used for, but what public space means. With this emerging need architects will have a pivotal role in facilitating this need of public spaces, be it for living, gathering, etc. The Occupy settlements are a glimpse of people gathering around a cause and expressing their right to gather and be heard. Accompanying these gatherings are many more people feeling that they are not alone in experiencing these injustices. Resulting in a new phenomenon of people wanting to be together, feed off of each other, and join forces in order to change the things that, individually, we have sat aside and watched. Architecture can be many things, but it is most definitely a response to the needs of the people. Right now the people are expressing what they need in public spaces, it is our job to fulfill that need.
]]> http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2011-12-15T16:49:02-05:00 However, looking past this minor issue, we see a more important issue which the Occupy Wall Street movement has brought greater attention to. As stated in the article, too often do architect professionals and students design for the institutionalized 1 % and neglect the greater 99% and subject them to the standards of the 1%. There is a giant market for dwellings and infrastructure that support the 99%. As architects and designers we must really challenge the status quo.
As a current architecture student, I am seeing this profession changing right before my very eyes. In addition to the typical firm environment that so many students seek upon graduation, there are non-traditional or alternative ways to utilize my knowledge and talents gained from my architectural education. I see the issues and challenges posed by the Occupy Wall Street movement as a window of opportunity for many young forward thinking architects. With the economy and job markets becoming more difficult, I believe finding alternatives to traditional architecture practice will begin to address important issues like those brought to our attention by the Occupy movements.
]]> http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2011-12-15T14:53:12-05:00 http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2011-12-15T02:34:05-05:00 The need for temporary structure is an idea to be considered. With the current “Occupy Wall Street” movement making its way around the country issues of shelter are very important and should be addressed by officials. The use of shelters used in emergency situations and natural disasters are something that might be plausible for temporary usage. Temporarily allowing the public space to be transformed into a place for social and political movements to take place is a great idea and would increase our citizen’s ability to response to political agenda. The architect is not likely to consider any public site they design as a possible place of radical movements. Permanent infrastructure of long term shelter – in my eyes as architecture student – at the urban level is not an idea that should be developed further.
The spaces are serving purpose as places of meeting for the occupy Wall Street participants, and that is awesome, but none of these people will be there forever.
]]> http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2011-12-14T23:36:59-05:00 http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2011-12-09T17:38:37-05:00
numerous groups around the us have started researching publicly owned public spaces--the result of that data collection feeds directly into possible avenues for occupy action [including #whOWNSpace, whose page links to this very essay! http://nyc.thepublicschool.org/class/3826]

discourse on the topic has been addressed prior to the occupation [http://occupyeverything.org/] and after it, by a few conferences and calls for papers. it is important here to negotiate the line between critical discourse and profiting from a 'trend' of some sort--sadly some projects fall in the later group but hopefully some have successfully avoided it.

i agree models are important--and hope architecture studios take note, and conceive of thoughtful ways to frame the problem without resourcing to indulgent beautifully rendered formal excesses--it is so easy to imagine uncritical utopias.

]]> http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2011-11-20T00:59:34-05:00
“Cohousing is a type of collaborative housing in which residents actively participate in the design and operation of their own neighborhoods. Cohousing residents are consciously committed to living as a community. The physical design encourages both social contact and individual space. Private homes contain all the features of conventional homes, but residents also have access to extensive common facilities such as open space, courtyards, a playground and a common house.” –from cohousing.org

Living in a neighborhood where you have a social and physical support system is just good common sense. There are examples of affordable housing that closely follows this model (Petaluma Avenue Homes) and seniors (Silver Sage), as well as families and singles all over this country (and canada, and australia, denmark, england, etc) For a really thorough breakdown of cohousing, and some stellar examples check out Creating Cohousing: Building Sustainable Communities by Katie McCamant and Charles Durrett.
]]> http://places.designobserver.com/feature/occupy-what-architecture-can-do/31128/#comments 2011-11-11T13:35:32-05:00